ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2025
Nursing consultation and diabetes: an educational and transformative process for primary health care.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nursing consultation based on supported self-care for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a quasi-experimental study.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Effects of a standardized nursing care program on patient outcomes and nursing competence in diabetic patients at a primary hospital.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- [Nursing consultations in primary health care in Brazil: distribution and productivity in the management of chronic noncommunicable diseasesConsultas atendidas por personal de enfermería en la atención primaria de salud en Brasil: distribución y productividad en las consultas relativas a enfermedades crónicas no transmisibles].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective
methodconvergent care research carried out with 12 nurses. Participant observation, semi-structured individual interviews and convergence groups were used to collect data, which were treated by participatory analysis, with an interpretative approach.
resultsthe promotion of self-care, the bond between professionals and users, and the support for lifestyle changes for people with diabetes were aligned with the proposed Care Model. On the other hand, attitudes, values and knowledge that weaken care were identified as divergent. The theoretical and practical deepening of the care model, diabetes, dealing with work overload, and the implementation of a guide and a protocol for the development of the nursing consultation were points of convergence for improving the quality of the consultation. It was also observed that nurses' autonomy was strengthened, critical thinking was awakened, and the search for improvement and redefinition of the relationship with the user was sought.
conclusionthe nursing consultation was enhanced through the active participation of nurses in an educational, reflective and dialogical process.
background(1) The Nursing Consultation for people with DM by nurses consisted of elements that are similar to and different from the MACC. (2) Elements that align with the MACC: as establishing a bond with users, accountability, longitudinal care, and the social and family approach. (3) Elements diverged from the assumptions of MACC: a limited understanding of the care model, the professional attitude of blaming the user and the weaknesses in the application of the nursing process. (4) The nursing consultation was enhanced through the active participation of nurses in an educational, reflective and dialogical process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.